A to P and describes the continents, winds, seas, length of the
oikoumene ̄ (in stades), and perimeters of some Mediterranean islands between the Strait
of Gibraltar in the west and Lesbos in the east. Written without literary pretensions, the
work seems influenced by E. Agathe ̄meros quotes from D and
T, and draws from A E and M P-
for the passage on perimeters. The MS-tradition appended two anonymous works to
the Geo ̄graphias hupotupo ̄sis: the Hupotupo ̄sis geo ̄graphias en epitome ̄ was present already in the
codex Palatinus gr. 398 (see E ). Then in the 15th c. the Diagno ̄sis en
epitome ̄ te ̄s en te ̄ sphaira geographias was added: see S . Two
further fragments concern distances (in stades) and islands: GGM 2.509–511.
A. Diller, “Agathemerus, Sketch of Geography,” GRBS 16 (1975) 59–76.
KP 1.116, H. Gams; HLB 1.528; BNP 1 (2002) 312, K. Brodersen.
Andreas Kuelzer
Agathinos of Sparta (30 – 70 CE)
Greek physician from Sparta, active in Rome, probably distinct from Claudius Agathinos of
Bithunia (1st c. BCE), but possibly in contact with the Stoic L. Annaeus Cornutus. Agathi-
nos may have been a pupil of A A (Wellmann 1895: 14), or just a
member of his circle (G, Dign. Puls. 1, 8.787 K.). His students included A
and H (P.). Agathinos is generally considered a Pneumaticist (Gale ̄n,
Diff. Puls. 3, 8.674 K.), or even that school’s founder (Gourevitch 1993: 135–136). P-
G D (19.353 K.) further credited him with creating the episunthetic or
eclectic school (cf. 7.359, 8.771 K.). He seems also to have borrowed Empiricist and
Methodist elements, and (probably S in) C A includes him
among the Methodists (ex nostris: Acut. 2.57, CML 6.1.1, p. 166). The unfixed and pre-
liminary state of the developing school, or else his own attempt to transcend contemporary
medical sectarianism, may be the origin of the ambiguity of his affiliation. Pneumaticism
indeed seems to have evolved rapidly to an open and flexible system, permeable to hetero-
geneous contributions.
In accord with Pneumaticist theory on the importance of the vascular system as the
vehicle of pneuma, Agathinos wrote on pulse (Gale ̄n, Diff. Puls. 2 [8.593–594 K.], 4
[8.748–750, 753–754 K.], Dign. Puls. 1 [8.787 K.], 4 [8.931, 935–936, 953 K.]), fever
(Gale ̄n, Febr. Diff. 2 [7.367, 369, 373 K.], De Typis [7.469 K.]; 17A.120, 228, 942 K.),
pharmaceuticals (Gale ̄n, CMGen 5 [13.830 K.]), and hydrotherapy (O, Coll. 10.7,
CMG 6.1.2, pp. 49–53). He wrote a book on hellebore (Cael. Aur., Acut. 3.135, CML 6.1.1,
p. 371; cf. Oreib., Coll. 8.2, CMG 6.1.1, p. 252), speculated on the definitions to be used in
sphygmology (Gale ̄n, Diff. Puls. 4 [8.750 K.]), and analyzed tertian fever, distinguishing an
intermediary semi-tertian fever on which he might have written a treatise (Marganne 1981:
311 – 314).
Only fragments of Agathinos’ works survive, with the exception of the papyrus fragment
on semi-tertian fever attributed to him. Gale ̄n respected him highly (Adv. Typ. 7.488 K.;
Dign. Puls. 4 [8.938 K.]), and compared him with H for his efforts to improve
medicine and for his capacity to reason (Dign. Puls. 1 [8.786–788 K.]), but also criticized
Agathinos’ unnecessary prolixity (Diff. Puls. 4 [8.750 K.]), enigmatic explanations (Dign.
Puls. 4 [8.935 K.]), and excessive emphasis on terms rather than on facts (Febr. Diff. 2
[7.367 K.]).
AGATHINOS OF SPARTA